DOCSLIB.ORG

The Covenanters of Damascus; a Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect by George Foot Moore

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Covenanters of Damascus; a Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect by George Foot Moore The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Covenanters of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect by George Foot Moore This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license Title: The Covenanters of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect Author: George Foot Moore Release Date: April 12, 2010 [Ebook 31960] Language: English ***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE COVENANTERS OF DAMASCUS; A HITHERTO UNKNOWN JEWISH SECT*** The Covenanters of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect George Foot Moore Harvard University Harvard Theological Review Vol. 4, No. 3 July, 1911 Contents The Covenanters Of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect . .2 Footnotes . 59 [330] The Covenanters Of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect Among the Hebrew manuscripts recovered in 1896 from the Genizah of an old synagogue at Fostat, near Cairo, and now in the Cambridge University Library, England, were found eight leaves of a Hebrew manuscript which proved to be fragments of a book containing the teaching of a peculiar Jewish sect; a single leaf of a second manuscript, in part parallel to the first, in part supplementing it, was also discovered. These texts Professor Schechter has now published, with a translation and commentary, in the first volume of his Documents of Jewish Sectaries.1 The longer and older of the manuscripts (A) is, in the opinion of the editor, probably of the tenth century; the other (B), of the eleventh or twelfth. What remains of the book may be divided into two parts. Pages 1-8 of A, and the single leaf of B, contain exhortations and warnings addressed to members of the sect, for which a ground and motive are often sought in the history of the Jewish people or of the sect itself, together with severe strictures upon such as have lapsed from the sound teaching, and polemics against the doctrine and practice of other bodies of Jews. The second part, pages 9-16, sets forth the constitution and government of the community, and its distinctive interpretation and application of the law,—what may be called sectarian halakah. Neither part is complete; the manuscript is mutilated and defective at the end, there is apparently a gap between the first 1 Documents of Jewish Sectaries. Volume I. Fragments of a Zadokite Work. Edited, with Translation, Introduction, and Notes, by S. Schechter. Cambridge University Press. 1910. 3 and second parts, and it may be questioned whether the original beginning of the work is preserved. The lack of methodical arrangement in the contents leads Dr. Schechter to surmise that [331] what we have in our hands is only a compilation of extracts from a larger work, put together with little regard for completeness or order. An orderly disposition, according to our notions of order, is not, however, so constant a characteristic of Jewish literature as to make this inference very convincing. Manuscript A was evidently written by a negligent scribe, perhaps after a poor or badly preserved copy; B, which represents a somewhat different recension of the work, exhibits, so far as it goes, a superior text. When it is added that both manuscripts are in many places defaced or torn, it may be imagined that the decipherment and interpretation present serious difficulties, and that, after all the pains which Dr. Schechter has spent upon the task, many uncertainties remain. Facsimiles of a page of each manuscript are given; but in view of the condition of the text a photographic reproduction of the whole is indispensable. The legal part of the book, so far as the text is fairly well preserved, is not exceptionally difficult; the rules are in general clearly defined, and if in the peculiar institutions of the sect there are many things we do not fully understand, this is due more to the brevity with which its organization is described and to the mutilation of the text than to lack of clearness in the description itself. The attempt to make out something of the history and relations of the sect from the first part of the book is, on the other hand, beset by many difficulties. What history is found there is not told for the sake of history, but used to point admonitions or emphasize warnings; and, after the manner of the apocalyptic literature, historical persons and events are referred to in roundabout phrases which envelop them in an affected mystery. Even when such references are to chapters of the national history with which we are moderately well acquainted, as in the Assumption of Moses, c. 5, ff., for example, they may be 4The Covenanters of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect to us baffling enigmas; much more when they have to do, as is in large part the case in our texts, with the wholly unknown internal or external history of a sect. The obscurity is increased by the fact that the allusions are often a tissue of fragmentary quotations or reminiscences out of the Old Testament, chosen and combined, it seems, by purely verbal association, or taken in an occult [332] allegorical sense.2 The allegories of which an interpretation is given, as when Amos 5 26 f. is applied to the emigration to Damascus and the institutions and laws of the sect, and Ezekiel 44 15 to the classes of the community, do not encourage us to think that we should be able to divine the meaning by our unaided intelligence. It is a fortunate circumstance that the writer comes back more than once to the salient events in the sect's history, for these repetitions of the same thing in different forms afford considerable help to the interpreter, so that the main facts may be made out with at least a considerable degree of probability. The principal seat of the sect was in the region of Damascus, where its adherents formed numerous communities. It was composed of Israelites who had migrated thither from Judaea; thither also had come “the interpreter of the law,” the founder of the sect; there it had been organized by a covenant repeatedly referred to as “the new covenant in the land of Damascus.” Many who entered into this new covenant at the beginning did not long remain true to it; the writer inveighs vehemently against those who fell away, accusing them not only of grave error, but of gross violations of the law; but this crisis had been passed, and when the book was written the community was apparently flourishing. The most coherent account of the origin of the sect is found on pages 5-6:3 At the end of the devastation of the land arose men who 2 It may be added that the quotations are singularly inexact. 3 In my translation I have sometimes thought it possible to adhere to the text where Dr. Schechter has preferred a conjectural emendation. 5 removed the boundary and led Israel astray; and the land was laid waste because they spoke rebelliously against the commandments of God by Moses and also against his holy Anointed,4 and prophesied falsehood to turn Israel back from following God. But God remembered the covenant with the forefathers, and he raised up from Aaron discerning men and from Israel wise men, and he heard them, and they dug the well. “The well, princes dug it, nobles of the people delved it, with the legislator” (Numbers 21 18). The well is the law, and they who dug it are the captivity of Israel5 who went forth from the land of Judah and sojourned in the land of Damascus, all of whom God called princes because they [333] sought him.6... The legislator is the interpreter of the law, as Isaiah said, “Bringing forth a tool for his work” (Isa. 54 16), and the nobles of the people are those who came to delve the well with the statutes which the legislator decreed that men should walk in them in the complete end of wickedness; and besides these they shall not obtain any (statutes) until the teacher of righteousness shall arise in the last times. The migration is referred to in several other places: “The captivity of Israel, who migrated from the land of Judah” (4 2 f.);7 “those who held firm made their escape to the northern land,” by which the region of Damascus is meant (7 13 f.; cf. 7 15, 18 f.). The time of the migration is plainly indicated in the passage quoted above (5 20 ff.). The men who, after the end of the devastation of the land, “removed the boundary,” and led Israel astray, speaking rebelliously against the commandments of God by Moses and against his holy Anointed, prophesying falsely to turn Israel away from following God, in consequence 4 That is, probably, against the legitimate high priest of the time (perhaps Onias).—The rendering “by his Anointed” is grammatically admissible, but would be unintelligible in this context. 5 It would be possible to render “the penitents of Israel.” 6 The four or five words which follow are unintelligible. 7 The references are to page and line of the Hebrew text. 6The Covenanters of Damascus; A Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect of which the land was laid waste, are most naturally taken for the hellenizing leaders of the Seleucid time. In this period, it seems that a number of Jews, including priests and levites, withdrew to the region of Damascus,8 and there they subsequently bound themselves by covenant to live strictly in accordance with the law as defined by their legislator.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hanukah History
    A BRIEF HISTORY OF Chanukah More than a little oil – edited by Rabbi Ron Symons Alexander the Great conquered Israel in the 4 th century B.C.E. He was a benevolent ruler result of a vision he was said to have had before he began any battle. The story goes that upon entering Jerusalem, he was met by the High Priest, Shimon HaTzaddik. Before every battle, he saw his likeness in a vision. As a result, he cancelled taxes on the Jews during the Sabbatical year, offered animals in the Temple on his own behalf, and granted the Jews religious freedom. Conditions changed when Alexander died. His empire was divided among different generals. After a power struggle, Israel came under the control of the Seleucid Dynasty – Greek kings who ruled from Syria. Until this point, the major threat was spiritual annihilation resulting from Hellenization, the adaptation of Greek culture and philosophy (assimilation). Hellenization attacked the moral, ethical and religious fibre of Judaism. Many Jews resisted assimilation but many became ardent Hellenists. Under the Seleucid kings, this situation continued. With the rise of Antiochus IV both the spiritual and physical survival of the Jewish people was severely threatened. Sadly enough, Jewish Hellenists contributed towards Jewish destruction by complaining to the king that the pace of assimilation was not fast enough. Tragedy resulted. One man, named Joshua, or the Hellenized Jason, bribed the King into replacing the high priest and appointing him instead. This new “high-priest” erected a gymnasium near the Temple where the priests would go and play sports, thereby neglecting their duties.
    [Show full text]
  • Levi References & Notes
    LEVI REFERENCES & NOTES: Ahimelech is of Ithamar’s line; Zadok is GERSHON KOHATH MERARI of Eleazar’s line (1 Chr. 24:2,3,6). Ahimelech murdered at Nob under Saul, Abiathar escapes to David (1 Sam. 22). AMRAM IZHAR HEBRON UZZIEL Abiathar unfaithful as high priest under David (defects with Adonijah); Zadok a faithful priest at time of David (1 Kings 1:5- AARON MOSES MIRIAM KORAH NEPHEG ZICHRI 8). Zadok made high priest under Solomon; fulfils prophecy of taking priesthood from NADAB ABIHU ELEAZAR ITHAMAR SONS OF KORAH house of Eli (1 Kings 2:27, 35) *Therefore Eli must have been of Ithamar’s line. At PHINEHAS some point the priesthood seems to have ELI* passed to Eli from Phinehas (and so changing family lines). PHINEHAS Line of Zadok lasted until the exile and AHITUB also the return (1 Chr. 6:8-15; cf. Ezra 3:2). ETHAN HEMAN ASAPH It continued through intertestamental AHIMELECH (JEDUTHAN) times until Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175- 164 B.C.) sold the priesthood to Menelaus, ZADOK ABIATHAR who was not of the priestly line (2 Macb 4:23-50). By the time of Christ, Roman powers often appointed High Priests for SERAIAH political reasons, and they did not serve *Eli succeeded Abishua or Uzzi for life (it was not a hereditary office). (Josephus, Antiq. viii. 1, 3; v.11, 5). EZRA** JEHOZADAK Key singers/musicians appointed to JESHUA **Ezra was the brother Jehozadak, accompany the ark being bought to JOIAKIM Post-exilic who was taken into captivity by Jerusalem under David (1 Chr. 15).
    [Show full text]
  • BIBLICAL GENEALOGIES Adam → Seth
    BIBLICAL GENEALOGIES Adam → Seth → Enosh → Kenan → Mahalalel → Jared→ Enoch → Methuselah → Lamech → Noah (70 descendants to repopulate the earth after the flood – Gen. 10: 1- 32; 1 Chr. 1: 1-27; sons, grandsons, great grandsons): 1 2 The sons of Kenaz (1 Chr. 1: 36) joined the Jews by the tribe of Judah. His descendant was Jephunneh the Kenizzite, who begot Caleb (Num. 32: 12; Josh. 14: 6; 14; 1 Chr. 4: 13-15). Amalek was the father of the Amalekites. Descendants of Jacob (Gen. 46: 26-27) who came to Egypt: • From Reuben: Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron and Carmi. • From Simeon: Jemuel, Jamin, Ohad, Jakin, Zohar and Shaul (son of a Canaanite woman). • From Levi: Gershon, Kohath and Merari. • From Judah: Er ( in Canaan), Onan ( in Canaan), Shelah, Perez and Zerah; From Perez: Hezron and Hamul. • From Issachar: Tola, Puah (or Puvah, Masoretic text), Jashub (or Iob, Masoretic text) and Shimron. • From Zebulun: Sered, Elon and Jahleel. • Dinah (they were all sons of Leah , who had died in Canaan – Gen. 49: 31); total of 33 people (including Jacob). • From Gad: Zephon (Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch or Ziphion in Masoretic text), Haggi, Shuni, Ezbom, Eri, Arodi and Areli • From Asher: Imnah, Ishvah, Ishvi, Beriah and Serah (their sister). Beriah begat Heber and Malkiel (they were all sons of Zilpah , Leah’s maidservant); total of 16 people. • From Joseph: Manasseh and Ephraim. • From Benjamin: Bela, Beker, Ashbel, Gera, Naaman, Ehi, Rosh, Muppim, Huppim and Ard. They were all sons of Rachel , who had already died in Canaan – Gen. 35: 19), a total of 14 people.
    [Show full text]
  • Jason (High Priest)
    Jason (high priest) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_(high_priest) Jump to navigation Jump to search of the Oniad family, brother to Onias III, was a High Priest in (יאסון ,Jason (Hebrew: Yason the Temple in Jerusalem. Josephus records that his name, before he hellenised it, was [Yēshua`).[1 י ֵ ׁשו ּ ַﬠ originally Jesus (Hebrew Jason became high priest in 175 BCE after the accession of Antiochus IV Epiphanes to the throne of the Seleucid Empire. In an ongoing dispute between the current High Priest, Onias III, and Simon the Benjamite, Jason offered to pay Antiochus in order to be confirmed as the new High Priest in Jerusalem. Antiochus accepted the offer and further allowed Jason to build a gymnasium in Jerusalem and create a Greek-style Polis named after the king, Antioch.[2] With the creation of Antioch, Jason abandoned the ordinances given under Antiochus III the Great, which defined the polity of the Judeans according to the Torah. Jason's time as High Priest was brought to an abrupt end in 171 BCE when he sent Menelaus, the brother of Simon the Benjamite, to deliver money to Antiochus. Menelaus took this opportunity to "outbid" Jason for the priesthood, resulting in Antiochus confirming Menelaus as the High Priest. Jason fled Jerusalem and found refuge in the land of the Ammonites.[3] In 168 BCE Jason made a failed attempt to regain control of Jerusalem. Fleeing again to Ammon, he then continued to Egypt, then finally to Sparta, where he died and was buried [4] See also Hellenistic Judaism References Cohen, Shaye J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Shiur Handout
    c"qa CAN YOU ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS? 1. How many battles did the Maccabees win prior to the rededication of the Temple (Bais Hamikdash)? 2. Describe the role of the assimilated Jews in the war with the Syrians. 3. How many years had the Temple fallen into disuse before the rededication? 4. Describe the new Menorah that was used at the rededication. 5. Who was Alcimus? This and much more will be addressed in the eleventh lecture of this series: "Chanukah". To derive maximum benefit from this lecture, keep these questions in mind as you listen to the tape and read through the outline. Go back to these questions once again at the end of the lecture and see how well you answer them. PLEASE NOTE: This outline and source book was designed as a powerful tool to help you appreciate and understand the basis of Jewish History. Although the lectures can be listened to without the use of the outline, we advise you to read the outline to enhance your comprehension. Use it as well as a handy reference guide and for quick review. THE EPIC OF THE ETERNAL PEOPLE Presented by Rabbi Shmuel Irons Series I Lecture #11 CHANUKAH I. The Struggle A. When Appollonius the general of the Samaritan forces heard this he took his army, and made haste to go against Judas; who met him, and joined battle with him, and beat him, and slew many of his men, and among them Appollonius himself, their general, whose sword being that which he happened to wear, he seized upon, and kept for himself; but he wounded more than he slew, and took a great deal of prey from the enemies' camp, and went his way.
    [Show full text]
  • Antiochus Epiphanes and the Jewish State
    ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES AND THE JEWISH STATE. By SHAILER MATHEWS, The University of Chicago. DURING the years of political change following the death of Alexander the Great a threefold development characterized the inner life of the Jews-that of "wisdom" literature, of legalism, and of the ritual and priesthood. In all of these particulars Jewish history is unique, but perhaps in none more unique than in the collection of proverbs and practical advice to be found in such writings as our canonical Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes, and such other writings as the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon. Like the other two tendencies, this is rooted in the history of the Hebrew race, for wise sayings of very ancient origin are clearly embraced in its early literature. But during the post-exilic period, and especially after the Greek influence began to be felt, it found its most remarkable expres- sion and became a literary form. To speak of it in detail is impossible, but one cannot overlook its knowledge of the world and its cynicism, as well as its most usual characteristics, sobriety and moral earnestness.' But good advice is seldom more than a luxury, and the history of the Jews was to center about the struggles between the two other tendencies which began during these years to show themselves so clearly. Indeed, the two hundred and fifty or three hundred years preceding the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus may be said to be filled with little else than the gradual and unobserved triumph of legalism in the persons of the pharisees over ritualism, whether in the persons of the Sadducees or of the nation as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • External Sources: Mishna 1:2 Gavriel Z
    TRACTATE AVOT EXTERNAL SOURCES: MISHNA 1:2 GAVRIEL Z. BELLINO תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא דף סט/א B. TALMUD TRACTATE YOMA 69A בעשרים וחמשה ]בטבת[ יום הר גרזים ]הוא[ דלא The twenty-fifth of Tebeth is the day of Mount Gerizim, on למספד יום שבקשו כותיים את בית אלהינו which no mourning is permitted. It is the day on which the Cutheans demanded the House of our God from Alexander מאלכסנדרוס מוקדון להחריבו ונתנו להם באו the Macedonian so as to destroy it, and he had given them והודיעו את שמעון הצדיק מה עשה לבש בגדי the permission, whereupon some people came and כהונה ונתעטף בבגדי כהונה ומיקירי ישראל עמו informed Simeon the Just. What did the latter do? He put ואבוקות של אור בידיהן וכל הלילה הללו הולכים on his priestly garments, robed himself in priestly מצד זה והללו הולכים מצד זה עד שעלה עמוד garments, some of the noblemen of Israel went with him carrying fiery torches in their hands, they walked all the השחר כיון שעלה עמוד השחר אמר להם מי הללו night, some walking on one side and others on the other אמרו לו יהודים שמרדו בך כיון שהגיע לאנטיפטרס side, until the dawn rose. When the dawn rose he זרחה חמה ופגעו זה בזה כיון שראה לשמעון ?[Alexander] said to them: Who are these [the Samaritans] הצדיק ירד ממרכבתו והשתחוה לפניו אמרו לו מלך They answered: The Jews who rebelled against you. As he גדול כמותך ישתחוה ליהודי זה אמר להם דמות .reached Antipatris, the sun having shone forth, they met When he saw Simeon the Just, he descended from his דיוקנו של זה מנצחת לפני בבית מלחמתי אמר carriage and bowed down before him.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministério Seara Ágape Ensino Bíblico Evangélico
    1 Ministério Seara Ágape Ensino Bíblico Evangélico https://www.searaagape.com.br/levitas_sacerdociolevitico.html BIBLICAL TOPICS FOR STUDY ––– LEVITES AND LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOPRIESTHOODDDD Author: Pastor Tânia Cristina Giachetti Levi was one of the twelve sons of the patriarch Jacob, and his descendants were separated from all their brethren to serve God as priests, especially the sons of Aaron. Levi begot Gershon, Kohath and Merari. Kohath begot Amram, and Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel. From the lineage of Amram, through Eleazar and Ithamar, the Lord separated the high priests. 2 Descendants of Levi [1 Chr. 6: 16-30; 31-48; 1 Chr. 15: 17-19; 1 Chr. 23: 1-32 (musicians of David *)]: 1) Gershon: Libni → generated offspring Shimei → generations → Berekiah → Asaph * 2) Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Uzziel, Hebron. Heman * is a descendant of Izhar. 3) Merari: Mahli → generated offspring Mushi → Mahli → generations → Ethan * (Jeduthun): 1 Chr. 15: 19; 1 Chr. 25: 1; 3. So, we can understand that the Levites were priests who served the Lord, but only those of the lineage of Amram, more specifically of Aaron, were fit to be high priests, for God Himself established to be so, when He spoke with Moses on Mount Sinai. One of the descendants of Eleazar (son of Aaron) gave his name to the eighth family (the family of Abijah) among the twenty-four divisions of the priests (1 Chr. 24: 10), of which Zechariah (Lk 1: 5), the father of John the Baptist, was part. High priests (1 Chr. 6: 1-15; 49-53): Aaron → Eleazar → Phinehas → Abishua → Bukki → Uzzi → Zerahiah → Meraioth → Amariah → Ahitub → Zadok (in the time of David) → Ahimaaz → Azariah → Johanan → Azariah (in the time of Solomon) → Amariah → Ahitub → Zadok → Shallum → Hilkiah → Azariah (2 Chr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Book of Enoch and Second Temple Judaism. Nancy Perkins East Tennessee State University
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 12-2011 The Book of Enoch and Second Temple Judaism. Nancy Perkins East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the History of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Perkins, Nancy, "The Book of Enoch and Second Temple Judaism." (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1397. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1397 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Book of Enoch and Second Temple Judaism _____________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of History East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Arts in History _____________________ by Nancy Perkins December 2011 _____________________ William D. Burgess Jr., PhD, Chair Keith Green, PhD Henry Antkiewicz, PhD Keywords: Book of Enoch, Judaism, Second Temple ABSTRACT The Book of Enoch and Second Temple Judaism by Nancy Perkins This thesis examines the ancient Jewish text the Book of Enoch, the scholarly work done on the text since its discovery in 1773, and its seminal importance to the study of ancient Jewish history. Primary sources for the thesis project are limited to Flavius Josephus and the works of the Old Testament. Modern scholars provide an abundance of secondary information.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading the First Century
    Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Herausgeber / Editor Jörg Frey (Zürich) Mitherausgeber / Associate Editors Friedrich Avemarie † (Marburg) Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala) Hans-Josef Klauck (Chicago, IL) Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg) 300 Daniel R. Schwartz Reading the First Century On Reading Josephus and Studying Jewish History of the First Century Mohr Siebeck Daniel R. Schwartz, born 1952; 1980 PhD, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; since 1995 Professor of Jewish History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. ISBN 978-3-16-152187-4 ISSN 0512-1604 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament) Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliogra- phie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2013 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. www.mohr.de This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by Martin Fischer in Tübingen, printed by Gulde-Druck in Tübin- gen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. Arnaldo Dante Momigliano (1908–1987) In Memoriam Preface The movement toward reading Josephus through, and not merely reading through Josephus to external realities, now pro- vides the dominant agenda.1 The historian is not an interpreter of sources, although interpret he does. Rath- er, he is an interpreter of the reality of which the sources are indicative signs, or fragments.2 The title of this volume, “Reading the First Century,” is deliberately para- doxical, for what we in fact read are texts, not a period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • Caiaphas, Johannes Romanus: John's Imperial Roman
    CAIAPHAS, JOHANNES ROMANUS: JOHN’S IMPERIAL ROMAN AUDIENCE by Andrew Simmonds In 1930s, alarmed by the Nazis’ embrace of the Gospel of John, Ernest Cadman Colwell1 advanced the thesis that John was written to appeal to cultured, wealthy, anti-Semitic, patriotic citizens of the Roman Empire.2 This article advances a related but more focused thesis, that John was written for the imperial court and administration, at a time when it was unprecedentedly anti-Semitic,3 and Judaism or Jewish-Christianity had infiltrated its highest echelons (Clemens’ and Domitilla’s children were the heirs to the throne).4 In his anti-Semitism and much else, Domitian was unlike his father, Vespasian, and brother, Titus, practical military men, who enjoyed good relations with such prominent Jewish 1 Colwell served as President of the University of Chicago from 1945 to 1951 and President of the Society of Biblical Literature in 1947. 2 Ernest Cadman Colwell, “The Fourth Gospel and the Struggle for Respectability,” JR 14:3 (1934): 298 (“Nazi Official . in summer of 1933, announced that Christianity in the Third Reich would be based upon the Gospel of Love, i.e. John”), 301 (“the most patriotic Roman citizen would find nothing to suggest that Christianity was a seditious movement”); Idem, John Defends the Gospel (Chicago: Willett, Clark, 1936), 43 (“the church is the enemy of” and “stand(s) outside Judaism;” “the pagan who approached Christianity through the pages of the Fourth Gospel would not suppose for a moment that Christianity was a Jewish movement”); 47 (“The cultured pagan who disliked the Jews would have no reason for disliking the Jesus of the Fourth Gospel”), 150; Alan Davies, “Racism and German Protestant Theology: A Prelude to the Holocaust,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 450 (1980): 28 and n.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus, the New Temple, and the New Priesthood
    Letter & Spirit 4 (2008): 47–83 Jesus, the New Temple, and the New Priesthood 1 Brant Pitre 2 Our Lady of Holy Cross College Almost fifty years ago, in his excellent but often-overlooked book, The Mystery of the Temple, the great Dominican theologian Yves Congar highlighted a paradox present in the gospels—a mystery of sorts: When the gospel texts are read straight through with a view to discovering the attitude of Jesus towards the Temple and all it represented, two apparently contradictory features become immediately apparent: Jesus’ immense respect for the Temple; his very lively criticism of abuses and of formalism, yet above and beyond this, his constantly repeated assertion that the Temple is to be transcended, that it has had its day, and that it is doomed to disappear. With these words, Congar put his finger on one of the most puzzling aspects of Jesus’ relationship to the Judaism of his day. For it is of course true that the Gospels contain numerous statements of Jesus in which he esteems the Temple as the dwelling place of God, and others in which he explicitly denounces the Temple and declares that it will eventually be destroyed. For example, on the one hand, Jesus says, “he who swears by the Temple, swears by it and by him who dwells in it” (Matt. 23:21). On the other hand, he denounces the city of Jerusalem for opposing the prophets of God and says to her: “Behold, your house [the Temple] is forsaken and desolate” (Matt. 23:38). How do we explain this seeming paradox? How can Jesus both revere the Temple and at the same time declare its eventual destruction? In order to answer this question, I will focus on four aspects of the Jewish Temple that are widely known but have not been sufficiently highlighted in the his- torical study of Jesus.
    [Show full text]